1 2025:CGHC:10347 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1511 of 2025 Kamal Narayan Nag S/o Late Rupdhar Nag Aged About 64 Years R/o Choriya, Kanker, District - North Baster, Kanker Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resource Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Executive Engineer Water Resource Department, Division - Kanker, District - North Baster, Kanker Chhattisgarh 3 - Treasury Officer Treasury Account And Pension, Kanker, District - North Baster, Kanker Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 03.03.2025 1. Heard Mr. Somkant Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents. YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.03.05 14:59:48 +0530 2 2. This petition has been filed by the original employee of the respondent-Department, with the following relief(s):- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent concerned to consider case of the petitioner for grant of benefit of leave encashment, within stipulated period. 10.2 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is retired employee of the respondent department, who was worked charged employee and later, his services were regularized. He submits that in the light of judgment passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No.3870 of 2021 (Faguvaram Patel & Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) and other connected matters decided on 30.09.2022, the petitioner is entitled for leave encashment. 4. Learned State counsel submits that sufficient documents have not been filed by the petitioner and it is also not reflected as to whether the petitioner has completed the minimum period of service to avail the benefit of leave encashment. 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 6. Be that as it may, without commenting anything on the merits, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to make detailed representation before the concerned 3 respondent/competent authority within the period of ‘30 days’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order with all necessary documents to substantiate his/her claim. In the event of filing of representation, on due verification, if the petitioner is found to be similarly situated persons, as in the case of Faguvaram Patel (supra), his/her claim shall be decided by the respondents in light of judgment of Faguvaram Patel (supra) expeditiously preferably within the period of ‘90 days’ from the date of submission of the said representation. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh